Jordan Peterson: Gender Pronouns and Free Speech War

Complexity

Padawan Learner
Have you actually listened to anything JBP was saying after he took the vaccine? Sounds like you didn't.
I don't avidly watch him, occasionally I might open his recommended videos to check in. As far as I'm concerned I've seen and heard enough. I recently started watching his daughters videos too, seems they both have the media bug.

There are a few factors here which are probably being taken largely for granted. One is that JP has already (and continues to) publicly take on some gigantic societal and political issues in a Major way; requiring an incredible amount of time, research, high levels of energy, will, discipline and rigor that is to be greatly respected, acknowledged and admired. The guy is simply tireless and relentless in sharing knowledge and which is evidenced by his prolific output. So most of his focus has obviously been on CRT, left wing authoritarianism, character growth, etc. And all of that while being attacked by much of the mainstream media.

Another dimension to this is that Peterson, himself, is on his own 'soul's journey', if you will. Which means that while he may have areas of awareness that may be "weak" (at least relative to what we know on a given subject) - he is forging his own personal path that is inherently "imperfect" or lopsided - just like anyone else. We, all of us, have blind spots, weaknesses, challenges etc. - that are specific to us as individuals. So while it may be a frustrating, from "someone in the know" to see just how he gets it wrong on occasion (especially because we like him, want him to know this or that important something, and because of his great reach and influence) it would be a mistake, I think, to leave so much out about Peterson "a soul in progress," in your reasoning.

Lastly, taking on such a view as you have seems quite limiting to me. Individuals, and life itself, are far more complex and varied than what you are suggesting here with your statements. Becoming more aware of how this is true - especially within one's own thinking and one's own self - is a nearly never-ending process. So to apply such black and white thinking to Jordan Peterson, I think, is to also be applying such limited thinking, to some great extent, to your own growth.
He "takes on huge societal and political issues in a major way", does he really? Throwing fuel on the fire of the pronoun wars, whilst paying lip service to the power establishment is your idea of bravery, or whatever positive descriptor? He wouldn't get so much air time on the main stream media if he was a threat to them. It's not just that he "gets things wrong on occasion", it's the issues he's getting wrong that are the red flags to some of us.

I'm not simplifying anything, but the first couple of people to respond to me paraphrased what I said, put words in my mouth and seemed to have no interest in reaching mutual understanding.

Complexity, based on the past few posts about your relationship with Corbyn and Peterson I think you put people on a pedistal, and when they became misaligned with your view how they “ought” to behave you pour a lot of emotionally charged derision on them (the higher the pedistal, the farther the fall). This tells me that your admiration of them is also based on a similarly distorted perception. Whether you idolize or anathematize someone (as all-good or all-bad) you are not quite seeing them in their full humanity, with their own shadows and own weakness.

To me that is the attitude of someone who feels like a victim, looks for a saviour, and villainizes people who stop fulfilling that role for you.
You think I put people on a pedestal? The first guy who wrote back to me on this topic in this thread insinuated Peterson was his hero, so that explained his motivation to defend him so passionately. It's not I who participate in hero worship, the closest thing I have to an hero is a musician.

I get kind of a Monday Morning Quarterback, vibe from your posts. It is easy from your armchair to critique those that are actually playing the game. Peterson is actually out there playing the game, in a most hostile environment, doing the best with whatever information and knowledge he has at the moment. Not easy to do. Like most humans, he has made some mistakes. But I get the feeling that his heart is in the right place, and that is what is important to me.
Yeah, Peterson is playing a game alright, and he's playing very well from what I gather here.

For what it's worth I agree with Whitecoast. I remember seeing large swaths of both Peterson's 'fans' and those that hate him jump on him for the Benzo situation.Some of the 'arguments' boiled down to things like "why should I stop smoking pot, when he's a drug addict". Or "why should I take responsibility for my life, when his is falling apart". Obviously they where not that succinct, but that's how I read them.
Forums, twitter, youtube comments.

Given Peterson has taken on somewhat of a father figure archetype for so many, you may (if you choose to) want to stop and consider:
1) What you feel about Peterson - bitterness? anger? distrust? etc
2) What you feel/think about your own father (or male role models growing up) - "he can do no wrong" - hero worship, "he is always wrong" - bitters/anger/resentment/rebellion, "I will never be like him, he was a monster", "I will be like him, he was perfect" etc
3) Does some part of you feel 'glee' or 'relief' at dismissing Peterson without question? Does some part of you feel 'betrayed' or 'abandoned'? If so, how's Personal Responsibility for your life going? Do you expect it to be 'perfect'? Always 'failing'?
Things I feel regarding Peterson: Distrust, disdain, amusement.

Why are you trying to psychoanalyse my feelings about my father, when my arguments about Peterson are based on his track record of shilling for the globalist agenda? I would venture to suggest those are underhanded, off topic tactics - and I wonder where it is you got the inspiration for such an approach.

I have not dismissed Peterson without question, on the contrary, I prefer to frame this as me challenging the unquestioning hero worship of Peterson, which I see present here in this thread.

@Complexity Perhaps a more productive way of looking at it, instead of judging someone like JP for mistakes in his judgement, would be to perceive the matrix that is all around us and which manipulates our thinking. We sometimes forget that JP and many other public figures still live much more in the Mainstream Bubble than it sometimes seems. In that sense it's interesting to witness the effects this has (I can certainly relate), how they deal with it in their own ways, where they break out, and when this surrounding spell (and this is what it is: a spell) is still too strong.

If we manage to put ourselves in their shoes, and experience the flavor of that spell too, we can also learn something about ourselves. Because we, too, are still subject to this spell in many ways. (Don't forget that this spell isn't just the latest lie peddled on the news, but has been created for centuries and longer). Still way to go! I shudder to think what I will think in 5 years from now about some of my current takes on things.
Sounds new age, defeatist and like some psyop has been successful.

He IS backtracking, that's pretty much what I said. However, vast swathes of the media in general are definitely NOT backtracking, at least , not that I've seen.

I'm pretty sure no one is wanting it "both ways". In fact, we were pretty clear that we view it as him having made a mistake and recognizing it. That's the point. Clearly Peterson was not intelligent enough to "spot the greatest con in modern history" (as you put it), but that doesn't mean he isn't intelligent, he clearly is.
Not sure what your point is here other than ragging on someone for making a mistake and then correcting it. Like I said, your response is a common one from a person who over-idealized someone and then watched them "fall" from that lofty position. The solution, in such a case, is not to "throw the person out of your heart", but consider that you likely (in fact, most assuredly) expected far too much from that person. The mistake, in the end, was yours, not Peterson's.

My counter-argument was to point out that you were at fault, not defend Peterson.

Sorry I could articulate myself clearer. What I mean to say is, I don't think his back tracking is sincere at all. I think he's just another media marionette. In the interest of transparency, my biases against him are: his dimwitted promotion of the vaccine (being charitable), his defence of powers that shall not be named and his disparaging comments about "conspiracy theorists", which I guess I take to heart.

On the so-called “Jewish Question”​

The players of identity politics on the far right continue ever-so-pathologically to beat the anti-Semitic drum, pointing to the over-representation of Jews in positions of authority, competence and influence (including revolutionary movements). I’m called upon–sometimes publicly, sometimes on social media platforms–to comment on such matters, and criticized when I hesitate to do so (although God only knows why I would hesitate :)
So let’s take apart the far-right claims:

First, psychologically speaking: why do the reactionary conspiracy theorists even bother? This is a straightforward matter. If you’re misguided enough to play identity politics, whether on the left or the right, then you require a victim (in the right-wing case, European culture or some variant) and a perpetrator (Jews).

Once you determine to play, however, you benefit in a number of ways. You can claim responsibility for the accomplishments of your group you feel racially/ethnically akin to without actually having to accomplish anything yourself. That’s convenient. You can identify with the hypothetical victimization of that group and feel sorry for yourself and pleased at your compassion simultaneously. Another unearned victory. You simplify your world radically, as well. All the problems you face now have a cause, and a single one, so you can dispense with the unpleasant difficulty of thinking things through in detail. Bonus. Furthermore, and most reprehensibly: you now have someone to hate (and, what’s worse, with a good conscience) so your unrecognized resentment and cowardly and incompetent failure to deal with the world forthrightly can find a target, and you can feel morally superior in your consequent persecution


Second, in what manner (if any) are such claims true? Well, Jews are genuinely over-represented in positions of authority, competence and influence. New York Jews, in particular, snap up a disproportionate number of Nobel prizes (see this Times of Israel article), and Jews are disproportionately eligible for admission at elite universities, where they, along with Asians, tend to be discriminated against (see this Newsweek article). It’s possible that we should be happy about this, rather than annoyed: is the fact that smart people are working hard for our mutual advancement really something to feel upset? What, exactly, is the preferable alternative? In any case, the radical/identity-politics right wingers regard such accomplishment as evidence of a conspiracy. It hardly needs to be said that although conspiracies do occasionally occur, conspiracy theories are the lowest form of intellectual enterprise. Is there another, more credible explanation? Yes. Three well-documented factors in fact appear to be at play:

a) The significantly higher than average IQ of Ashkenazi Jews .....

... Continued

An alternative perspective to consider.
 
Last edited:

Henchman 21

Jedi Master
I don't see his life getting better on twitter.
You are probably correct but it will depend on how he uses it. He is back but so far not really using it. Maybe he will use it sparingly or only for specific reasons in which case it might go just fine for him.

I’m happy to see him back even if it is just that picture from The Shining 🤩
 

Joe

Administrator
Administrator
Moderator
FOTCM Member
He wouldn't get so much air time on the main stream media if he was a threat to them.

I think that's an oversimplification. There are plenty of examples of people to whom he MSM dedicated a lot of air time, mostly in an effort to subtly and not-so-subtly defame them.

when my arguments about Peterson are based on his track record of shilling for the globalist agenda?

I think the situation is, as is often the case, more complex and nuanced than you are suggesting. I could cite as many (if not more) examples of Peterson attacking the globalist agenda. All of your posts on this topic seem to display an "all or nothing" approach to Peterson. Almost all people are a jumble of complex and often contradictory ideas from which it is not easy to draw a definitive 'black and white' conclusion.

I have not dismissed Peterson without question, on the contrary, I prefer to frame this as me challenging the unquestioning hero worship of Peterson, which I see present here in this thread.

You should not take people's disagreement with your perspective as evidence of "hero worship of Peterson". Someone should be able to disagree with your thesis without being accused of holding to its antithesis.

I don't think his back tracking is sincere at all. I think he's just another media marionette

And that seems to be a good summation of your general point. The problem is that there is no evidence to back up your belief in this regard, it's just your personal assessment, that seems to fly in the face of the available evidence. You're asking us to seriously entertain a thesis that is based mostly on your own personal feelings (not facts) about the matter which, as I said, come with little or no supporting evidence.

It doesn't seem to me that a discussion on that basis provides much benefit to anyone. So maybe we should just agree to disagree.
 

Voyageur

Ambassador
Ambassador
FOTCM Member
He "takes on huge societal and political issues in a major way", does he really?

You may not see it from where you live, however he has tried, which is more than most Do - examples:


An alternative perspective to consider.

Considered, with the line of force being it is all a 'cult' of cleaning your room. The anti-Marxist Marxist bent upon conditioning males. A cult leader bar none, and oh, he even exclude Faith Goldie.

As Joe said:
I think the situation is, as is often the case, more complex and nuanced than you are suggesting. I could cite as many (if not more) examples of Peterson attacking the globalist agenda. All of your posts on this topic seem to display an "all or nothing" approach to Peterson. Almost all people are a jumble of complex and often contradictory ideas from which it is not easy to draw a definitive 'black and white' conclusion.

Indeed, people are that, Peterson included, with people constantly changing.
 

RedFox

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
I always like hearing where JP is on certain topics, especially as they relate to how the forum as a whole see's the world.
It seems he's been giving a lot more consideration to the roll psychopathy plays in the mess we're in recently - especially well articulated in the Sky News Australia video below. The topic of which is covered mostly in the last 1/3rd of the interview.
TL:DR; social media (virtualization of the environment) and 'woke' governance tilt towards narcissism and psychopathy. He has to perhaps see that narcissism and psychopathy tilt the social landscape in that direction (towards a self sustaining negative feedback loop), but I imagine at this point he's considering it more deeply.
 

Glenn

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
story-telling-with-drag-queens-event--1024x760.jpg


I saw a story here on global news about a protest about drag queens being brought in to the schools, but I can't seem to find the original story. Here is another site with the story, and of course you can guess how they covered it. Notice one of the 'performers' is called, 'Satanix'. How cute...

 

iamthatis

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
I've been following JP on twitter for a while now and I'm noticing some changes. What analysis can be drawn from this? It is not the only tweet about it.


Apparently JP is on the defensive simply labeling anyone who makes a criticism of Israel as anti-Semitism. I don't know, it's the first time I've seen this in him.

It's a good question. I can only guess.

As the old adage goes, Western civilization is said to be composed of Roman law, Greek Philosophy, and Christianity. Peterson is alarmed at how all of these structures are under attack in a sort of metaphysical civil war by the forces of nihilism and chaos, which may lead him to be very protective over these foundations of the West.

JP has certainly spent a lot of time on the Old Testament, including his in-depth psychological lecture series exploring the text and its possible meaning. As a Christian, I think he might feel indebted in some way to the OT as the collected works of the 'wisdom of the Jews'. Christianity is commonly understood to have been born from its Jewish precursor, and in a sense, Christianity needs Judaism in order to underwrite its legitimacy. And like it or not, Judaism in our day and age is sort of 'anchored' to Israel - which is a long, complex, and very bloody story, as Laura wrote in 9/11: The Ultimate Truth. A really, really fascinating read for any of those who haven't read it.

So there is a chain of associations here, where the meaning of his life - and his struggle against nihilism and chaos - is tied to his love of the West and his Christian understanding, which is tied to Judaism as he understands it, which is tied to Israel's existence as the anchor of Judaism. All this might lead him towards a certain romanticization towards Israel, and to feel protective over it in the face of all of these massive global changes. Its common in times of chaos for people to turn to tradition. Maybe we got a glimpse of this in the video (linked above) of him imploring an Israeli audience with tears in his eyes that 'the world needs Jerusalem!' For him, at this point in his life, it may also be some sort of metaphysical anchor.

In reality, I think those who are at the heart of darkness in Israel are probably among his most fearsome opponents as agents of chaos and nihilism - they've just cloaked themselves in 'ancient legitimacy' that looks nothing like LGBTQ, BLM, or the green agenda crowd.

All this to say, there was a certain momentum behind his alliance with Ben Shapiro and the Daily Wire. We are all product of the company we keep to some degree. I have to say, I was pretty shocked when he toured around in Israel with Shapiro, which included his recent dinner with Netenyahu. The video of that discussion is behind a Daily Wire paywall.

On the esoteric note, though, given all the good he has done in the world, maybe he got pinged by portal energies or looked too deeply into Bibi's eyes when he was there...
 
Top Bottom